Paper ID #32523Elementary Students Learn How To Engineer Online (RTP)Dr. Stacy S. Klein-Gardner, Vanderbilt University Stacy Klein-Gardner’s career in P-12 STEM education focuses on increasing interest in and participation by females and URMs and on teacher professional development. She is an Adjunct Professor of Biomedi- cal Engineering at Vanderbilt University where she serves as the co-PI and co-Director of the NSF-funded Engineering For US All (e4usa) project. Dr. Klein-Gardner formerly served as the chair of the American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE) Board of Directors’ P12 Commission and the Pre-College
Paper ID #32691Preservice Teachers Noticing About Discussions to Support Students inRevising their Design Ideas (RTP)Dr. Pamela S. Lottero-Perdue, Towson University Pamela S. Lottero-Perdue, Ph.D., is Professor of Science and Engineering Education in the Department of Physics, Astronomy, and Geosciences at Towson University. She has integrated engineering into courses for PreK-8 teacher candidates, developed and directed a graduate STEM program for PreK-6 teachers, and partnered with teachers to implement PreK-8 engineering learning experiences. She has authored numerous engineering-focused teacher practitioner articles
Paper ID #32953Preservice Teachers Noticing About Students’ Written Design Performanceand Improvement Ideas (RTP)Dr. Pamela S. Lottero-Perdue, Towson University Pamela S. Lottero-Perdue, Ph.D., is Professor of Science and Engineering Education in the Department of Physics, Astronomy and Geosciences at Towson University. She has integrated engineering into courses for PreK-8 teacher candidates, developed and directed a graduate STEM program for PreK-6 teachers, and partnered with teachers to implement PreK-8 engineering learning experiences. She has authored numerous engineering-focused teacher practitioner articles
is currently engaged in multiple research projects that involve multidisciplinary collaborations in the field of engineering, medicine, and education, as well as research on teacher preparation and the conducting of evidence-based interventions in school environments.Dr. Stacy S. Klein-Gardner, Vanderbilt University Stacy Klein-Gardner’s career in P-12 STEM education focuses on increasing interest in and participation by females and URMs and teacher professional development. She is an Adjunct Professor of Biomedical Engineering at Vanderbilt University where she serves as the co-PI and co-Director of the NSF-funded Engineering For Us All (e4usa) project. Dr. Klein-Gardner formerly served as the chair of the ASEE
-bethke-wendellDr. Chelsea Andrews, Tufts University Chelsea Andrews is a post-doctoral researcher at Tufts University in Engineering Education. She received a B.S. from Texas A&M University in ocean engineering, an S.M. from MIT in civil and environmental engineering, and a PhD from Tufts University in Engineering Education. Her current research includes investigating children’s engagement in engineering design through in-depth case study analysis.Dr. Tejaswini S. Dalvi, University of Massachusetts, BostonChristine M. Kelly American c Society for Engineering Education, 2021 Assessing elementary students’ engineering design thinking with
Paper ID #34117Accessible Playground Design: A Community-Connected ElementaryEngineering Unit Focused on Designing Accessible Playground EquipmentDr. Tejaswini S. Dalvi, University of Massachusetts, Boston Tej is an Assistant Professor of Science Education and is affiliated with Department of Curriculum and Instruction and Center Of Science and Math In Context. She has a PhD in theoretical physics and has active research in field of elementary science and engineering education.Dr. Kristen B. Wendell, Tufts University Kristen Wendell is Associate Professor of Mechanical Engineering and Adjunct Associate Professor of
Paper ID #32965Lessons Learned from Evaluating Three Virtual Research Experiences forTeachers (RET) Programs Using Common Instruments and Protocols(Evaluation)Dr. Jean S. Larson, Arizona State University Jean Larson, Ph.D., is the Educational Director for the NSF-funded Engineering Research Center for Bio- mediated and Bio-inspired Geotechnics (CBBG), and Assistant Research Professor in both the School of Sustainable Engineering and the Built Environment and the Division of Educational Leadership and Innovation at Arizona State University. She has a Ph.D. in Educational Technology, postgraduate training in Computer
EECS in 1987 from MIT. Dr. Gennert’s research interests include robotics, computer vision, and image processing, with ongoing projects in humanoid robotics, robot navigation and guidance, biomedical image processing, and stereo and motion vision. He led WPI teams in the DARPA Robotics Challenge and NASA Space Robotics Challenge and is author or co-author of over 100 papers. His research has been supported by DARPA, NASA, NIH, NSF, and industry. He is a member of Sigma Xi, and a senior member of IEEE and ACM.Dr. Walter Towner, Worcester Polytechnic InstituteDr. Torbjorn S. Bergstrom, Worcester Polytechnic Institute American c Society for Engineering Education
. Kristie S. Gutierrez, Old Dominion University Dr. Gutierrez received her B.S. in Biology from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill in 2001, M.Ed. in Secondary Science Education in 2005 from the University of North Carolina at Wilmington, and Ph.D. in Science Education in 2016 from North Carolina State University. Dr. Gutierrez is currently serving as an Assistant Professor of Science Education in the Department of Teaching and Learning at Old Dominion University. She teaches elementary science methods and secondary science and mathematics methods courses with emphasis on multicultural education and equity pedagogies. Her research interests include both formal and informal STEM education, with specialization
ideas Build your Revise your Share your Try out yourproblem(s) in solutions to the considering chosen solution to make work with solution the story problem materials solution it better others Digital Lesson Library for grades PK-5 Mat erials Lis Follows the entire problem-solving Variety o t
teachers made in-the-moment that didand did not align with the planned curricular materials.Teachers’ instructional decision making To examine the kinds of supports that teachers use during instruction, we adapted theGess-Newsome (2015) instructional decision-making model that synthesizes other existingmodels of teacher professional knowledge (e.g., Ball et al., 2008; Grossman, 1990; Marks, 1990)as it articulates relationships among professional knowledge and teachers’ classroom practice. Inparticular, this framework helps articulate the ways that teachers’ topic-specific pedagogicalknowledge (TSPK), amplifiers and filters (i.e., teacher beliefs and prior knowledge), andteachers’ personal pedagogical content knowledge and skill (PCK&S
. Age ID Gender Role/Length of Experience/Training Site Range A1 50’s Female Library Media Specialist/17 years/Library Science Site 1 50s Female Engineering Teacher/12 years/Electronics, System Site 1 E1 Engineering, Education 30s Male Math, Engineering, CS Teacher/13 years/Math, Site 1 E2 Teaching, CS 40’s Male Math Teacher/3 years/Linguistic, English and Site 1 E3 Math 30s Female Director of Workforce Development and Social Site 2 A2 Enterprise/11 years/Visual
) isadministered with a single 11”x 14” piece of paper. First, participants were instructed to “Draw apicture of an engineer(s) engaging in their daily work. Include a speech bubble that tells aboutwhat they are doing.” Next, participants were instructed to provide answers to the followingprompts: (1) Describe what your engineer(s) is/are doing, (2) Based on the work depicted in yourdrawing, explain how your engineer(s) is/are using Science, and (3) Based on the work depictedin your drawing, explain how your engineer(s) is/are using Mathematics.Rubric DevelopmentThe DEAMS-R rubric was developed by two science education researchers and one mathematicseducation researcher in consultation with an engineering researcher. The development of therubric was
across the five periodical databases and restricted for peer-review journal publications. The resulting publications of each search was consolidated using 2Mendeley citation manager where duplicates were removed. Following the removal ofduplicates, we reviewed the article’s title and abstracts against the following research contextinclusion criteria: (1) participants in P-12 engaged in a STEM intervention with some focus onengineering, and (2) the measured affective view(s) focused on the views of the student as itrelates to engineering not the teacher, facilitator, or educator. Lastly, we scanned the remainingarticles’’ full-text against the
of an underlying factor(s), indicating that factor analysis is possible. Bartlett’s test ofsphericity measures the hypothesis that the item correlation matrix is an identity matrix, whichrepresents that factor analysis is not possible as the items are unrelated. A significant test result (p< 0.05) rejects the null hypothesis, indicating that the data are factorable [25].The number of factors were then determined using a scree plot examination, Kaiser test, andparallel analysis [24]. The scree plot is a line plot of eigenvalue factors that shows the point atwhich extracting more factors does not explain more variance. The Kaiser method retains factorswith eigenvalues greater than 1 [24]. Parallel analysis helps determine meaningful factors
the importance of resiliency and sustainably in civil engineering. Thisincrease in vocabulary is also evident in the sample responses in Table 3. Student Responses to "What is Civil Engineering?" 12 10 Frequency 8 6 4 2 Pre 0 Post re ct s s
to create presentations to other 4.26 4.67 0.24 teachers/professionals at meetings about your summer learning(s)*p ≤ 0.05** p ≤ 0.01*** Bonferroni adjusted p=0.05/12 ≤ 0.004Effect size: .1 to .29 small, .3 to .49 medium, and larger than .5 large [27] The 2019 survey included questions about participants’ comfort level in performing thetasks listed in Table 3. The overall increase in teachers’ comfort in performing tasks related tocurriculum development and inclusion of engineering and scientific research in their classactivities, suggests that the program had a positive impact with some statistically significant gains.“Creating problems with multiple solutions” (p ≤ 0.01), “Presenting
three caregivers enacted over the course of a five-month engineering program conducted in an out-of-school context. Our research question was asfollows: What roles do caregivers enact with/for their child during a family-based engineeringdesign project? Subsequently, we considered the contextual factors of the program that seemedto influence and shape caregivers’ role enactment. Results of our work provide further evidenceof the impact of caregiver inclusion in the process of learning engineering, not only on thestudent(s) involved, but also on caregivers. Findings support the benefit of incorporating familiaradults into the engineering learning process, while providing distinct avenues by whichcaregivers might acknowledge and value their own
education must continue. Our work adds to the conversation by providing directevidence of school, district, and state administrators’ perspectives. We will continue to engage inmultiple reflections and discussions with administrators across the nation in the coming years asthe e4usa scales up to create district-level partnerships. The study has implications for how schooland district partnerships may be developed to allow for reciprocal support as pre-collegeengineering education continues to grow.AcknowledgementsThis material is based upon work primarily supported by the National Science Foundation (NSF)under NSF Award Number EEC-1849430. Any opinions, findings and conclusions, orrecommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s
Item 4 5a. The teacher provides opportunities for from multiple STEM Cognitive Engagement in The teacher requires students to integrate content students to learn S/T/E/M concepts. disciplines to complete an from multiple disciplines. STEM activity. 5b. The teacher integrates content from
and explore challenges related to the transportation infrastructure.AcknowledgementThis material is based upon work supported by the U. S. Department of Transportation, FederalHighway Administration’s National Summer Transportation Institute. Portions of the workreported here, related to assessing student interest in- and awareness of- transportationengineering is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No.1744539. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this materialare those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the U.S. Department ofTransportation and the National Science Foundation.ReferencesAmerican Society of Civil Engineers-ASCE. (2021). 2021 Report
not necessarily reflect theviews of the National Science FoundationReferences[1] "Progress Report on the Federal Implementation of the STEM Education Strategic Plan," Office of Science and Technology Policy, Washington, DC, 2019.[2] N. S. B. National Science Foundation, "Science & Engineering Indicators 2018. NSB-2018-1," National Science Foundation, 2018.[3] "Survey: Teen Girls’ Interest in STEM Careers." Junior Achievement USA. https://jausa.ja.org/news/press-releases/survey-teen-girls-interest-in-stem-careers- decline (accessed February 1, 2021, 2021).[4] E. Cevik et al., "Assessing the effects of authentic experiential learning activities on teacher confidence with engineering concepts," presented at
prestige.Learning Experiences Influence Outcome Expectations Related to Engineering Careers In high school 271, both 271T1 and T2 talked about influences of courses or programs ontheir students’ postsecondary outcome expectations. T1 mentioned that “taking these classes 8[basic drawing classes] in high school is good because it's helping them narrow their focus andsee if it's something that they are interested in and if they're good at it,” implying that classesthat students take can influence their postsecondary outcome expectations, particularly on theirinterest in certain fields. This is further supported by a T1’s example:“she's [one of her
obtain a pool of respondents and facilitate interview selection in a largerphenomenographic study. This paper presents the results from the survey, and focuses ondeveloping a better understanding of mentoring in K-12 STEM outreach programs through theresearch question, Do K-12 STEM outreach program characteristics differ between programsthat are and are not believed to foster mentoring relationships between university and K-12students? The survey yielded useful responses from 61 program coordinators representing 131K-12 STEM outreach programs. Tests for association between individual program characteristicsand program coordinators’ beliefs about mentoring in their program(s) and a binomial logisticregression model were carried out using IBM SPSS
informstheir presentation.Acknowledgement: This material is based upon work supported by the National ScienceFoundation under Grant #s 1758317 and 1339951.Disclaimer: Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in thismaterial are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the NationalScience Foundation.References[1] R. W. Bybee, Case for STEM Education: Challenges and Opportunities, Arlington, VA, USA: National Science Teachers Association, 2013.[2] United States Department of Education, Fundamental Change: Innovation in America’s Schools Under Race to the Top, Washington, DC, USA, Nov. 2015. Available: https://www2.ed.gov/programs/racetothetop/rttfinalrptfull.pdf[3] United
review mainideas or common misconceptions about engineering.Activity Description: Each student will be provided stickers/sticky notes (if you want to doresearch with this activity put a number on them), and will be prompted to individually thinkabout up to 7 prompts about engineering. Students will place their sticker on a line somewherebetween strongly disagree and strongly agree to correspond with their response to the prompt.Intended Age: Upper elementary - lower high school Time Needed: 30 minutes - 1 hourActivity Steps: Prompts: 1. Provide students with stickers or 1. Engineering is in every community and sticky note(s) for the activity. makes a
]. Estimation can help students learn the connection between the mathematical formulas they use in class and the real-world applications around them [2].Stephany Coffman-Wolph References: Ohio Northern University [1] Raviv, D., & Harris, A. J. (2016, June), Estimation as an Essential Skill in Entrepreneurial Thinking Paper presented at 2016 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, New Orleans, Louisiana. 10.18260/p.26739Kimberlyn Gray [2] Bourn, R., & Baxter, S. C. (2013, June), Developing Mathematical Intuition by Building Estimation
pushed beyond the scope of criteria and constraints set up by the client and occasionally contemplated additional criteria that led to a greater diversity of outcomes. For example, Cameron’s questioning of Ben’s design led to Ben considering the size and other defining characteristics of the artifacts, criteria not mentioned by the client (see Table 2). Table 2 Cameron Questioning Ben’s DesignSpeaker Discourse Code(s)Ben No, no, no, but you have to agree that this one (pointing to his MSOL, own design) is pretty good though. You can't basically get ADS-cc through; you have to go through three times before you get to the artifacts because
literature review by Siekmannand Korbe [19], STEM skills refer to “a combination of the ability to produce scientificknowledge, supported by mathematical skills, in order to design and build (engineer)technological and scientific products or services” (2016, p. 45). Therefore, authors used the listby Carnevale et al.’s as a reference but did not set boundaries to identify STEM skills from videodata in this study. Cognitive STEM knowledge STEM Skills STEM Abilities Production and Processing Mathematics Problem Sensitivity Computers and Electronics Science Deductive Reasoning Engineering and Technology
]. Thisperception can cause students to question the relevance of the content they are learning insideand outside the academic content area. Establishing students' positive self-beliefs about theiracademic capabilities early on is vital as their beliefs about their abilities become less malleableover time [9]. If students do not understand mathematics and do not believe they can do it, theybecome disinterested and ultimately abandon pursuing mathematics and mathematics-relatedfields such as engineering [10].The integration of engineering with math and science is one mechanism that can foster theadoption of positive beliefs about mathematics. Harlan et al.'s [11] longitudinal comparison studyof middle school student cohorts showed the combination of